Just to confirm that there is a current legitimate scientific opinion on climate change being man-made and serious, I went to google scholar and searched for the phrase 'climate change' in the last two years. The merit of google scholar searches is that many of the wingnut claims are excluded from the search results--you only get real scholarship. I didn't see anything denying that climate change was real and man-made. Instead, I found publications like this one in Nature(which is one of the two or three most prestigious journals), which had this abstract(summary):

Significant changes in physical and biological systems are occurring on all continents and in most oceans, with a concentration of available data in Europe and North America. Most of these changes are in the direction expected with warming temperature. Here we show that these changes in natural systems since at least 1970 are occurring in regions of observed temperature increases, and that these temperature increases at continental scales cannot be explained by natural climate variations alone. Given the conclusions from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely to be due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, and furthermore that it is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent except Antarctica, we conclude that anthropogenic climate change is having a significant impact on physical and biological systems globally and in some continents.

Cynthia Rosenzweig et al. Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic climate change
Nature 453, 353-357.

Google scholar search:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=climate+change&as_ylo=2008&as_yhi=20...

That bogus Murdock Antarctic ice report also selected statements out of context to make its claim.

Here is another article citing the very same science group and quoting them as stating that the melting is much more serious than previously projected and will lead to massive sea level rise if left unchecked..

http://current.com/items/89845311_antarctic-glaciers-melting-faster-than...

The trick that climate crisis deniers are using is to pick dates of scoping the melting in a way that hides that the -very- recent extremely rapid melting which began only a few years ago.

Brook,

Consider the source...you cite an article from a Rupert Murdoch newspaper:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_owns_the_Australian_Newspaper

Not exactly a bastion of journalistic integrity. I'll take NASA's word on it over Rupert any day.

Nonsense. Antarctica is experiencing an extreme net loss of ice even though one smaller particular section has gained ice mass because of changed weather patterns. See the NASA study report at http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?old=2008012326052

On your other point, strange cold snaps are perfectly understandable on a planet with net warming. The warming creates a much more energetic, active and wildly oscillating jet stream which will sometimes dip so low into the South that it will pull down extreme, unseasonably cold weather from the north.

Actually, the SCIENTIFIC FACT is that Antarctic Ice has been growing (in the aggregate) since 1970, according to the latest scientific report, and that means somebody is lying. Let's see do I believe Al Gore or the scientists that actually measure this stuff for a living?

We've got frost warnings tonight in Mid-May -- the first time in my life I've ever seen this, and I live in the South. Diminished solar activity is pointing to extreme global cooling over the next few years. What says Mr. Jones?

you say:
"Global temperatures in the last decade are some of the hottest on record,"

others say:
http://iceagenow.com/
the NOAA is misinterpreting the onset of an ice age.

you say:
This is about science and a growing mountain of data.

I say:
this is about manipulation and a growing amount of data that is intentionally skewed.

why ?
global warming = a global tax.
tax competition is annoying governments everywhere and they want to get rid of it, so global warming is the answer they need.
there is to much politics messing with this debate,
change the way the science is funded and you may have hope of finding the real answer.

the climate that we need to get ready for is way worse than anyone would have you think, and stopping using energy is not going to help us.